Petraeus: The “mini-Tet” is coming; Update: No confidence vote coming against Maliki?
posted at 4:26 pm on July 7, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Yeah, I wrote about it six weeks ago. We’re on an unofficial timetable no matter what happens in Congress so expect plenty more of this over the next 10 weeks. It’s a cycle of emboldenment!
Sunni extremists are likely to try a series of high-profile attacks to grab the headlines ahead of a watershed report to Congress in September on political and military progress in Iraq, the top U.S. commander said Saturday.
“We expect they will try this — pull off a variety of sensational attacks and grab the headlines to create a ‘mini-Tet,’” Gen. David Petraeus said in an interview with The Associated Press.
He was referring to the 1968 Viet Cong and North Vietnamese Tet offensive that undermined public support for the Vietnam War in the United States. The offensive failed to achieve most of its tactical goal but it shattered political support for the Vietnam War among the U.S. public.
I don’t see why he’s only expecting it from AQ and the Sunnis. Iran stands to gain at least as much from a U.S. pullout as they do. Their proxies should be looking to strike too, unless the leadership thinks Bush would respond with an attack on Iran. Which, given how disaffected the Iranian population is right now, might be less of a bug than a feature in rallying the public to the regime’s side. I’m sure that’s one of the reasons Petraeus has been quietly rolling up Iranian-backed Shia cells and their celebrity instructors even while Bush obsesses publicly about Al Qaeda. He’s trying to head Iran off at the pass.
Santorum thinks the writing’s on the wall and expects plenty of blowback.
Update: I’m honestly not sure if this would hurt Bush or help him at this point. Maliki’s his guy but if a change at the top helps to move some of the benchmark legislation through parliament, it’s a big boost.
I doubt they have the votes, in any case.
CBS News has learned that on July 15, [senior Iraqi leaders] plan to ask for a no-confidence vote in the Iraqi parliament as the first step to bringing down the government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki…
Iraq’s prime minister is facing his most serious challenge yet. The no-confidence vote will be requested by the largest block of Sunni politicians, who are part of a broad political alliance called the Iraq Project. What they want is a new government run by ministers who are appointed for their expertise, not their party loyalty.
The Iraq Project is known to the highest levels of the U.S. government. CBS News has learned it was discussed in detail on Vice President Dick Cheney’s most recent visit to Baghdad, when he met with the Iraqi Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi…
Leaders of the Iraq Project claim they have the necessary votes to force al-Maliki to resign, but that has yet to be tested in parliament.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
This kind of s**t makes me really sad… If only the public knew what was going on. That the Democratic party effectively works for Al Qaeda. Yeah, I said it, because it’s f-ing true. They promise chaos and surrender, the enemy reacts by ramping up attacks… so that the Dems can go back and say “told ya so”. Notice that the chaos didn’t break out the day the war ended, it took a couple years to grow… the couple years the Dems grew increasingly opposed to the war they voted for after 13 years of making the WMD case. This self-fulfilling prophecy bulls**t wouldn’t be nearly the issue it is, if the enemy didn’t recognize the state of our media. If we were getting honest reporting (and the enemy knew it) they wouldn’t be so confident that the country is supporting surrender. This whole thing is making my head spin. I’m getting flashbacks of the past few years, and how downright evil these Democrats have become. There really is no other word for it. This is a sad, sad day folks. It’s over. The Democrats want all those American deaths to be for nothing, because what’s really important is winning elections. Disgusting.
RightWinged on July 7, 2007 at 4:44 PM
That’s right, Right Winged. We should just stick it out, stay there as long as it takes to make the area submissive, even if it takes decades and decades.
You’re also right that the Democrat idiots hate America and Freedom. They should be outlawed and the Republican party should be split into two.
What about internment camps for Dems???
congsan on July 7, 2007 at 4:54 PM
And I have no doubt whatsoever that they are closely coordinating this with their allies the MSM – particularly Associated [with terrorists] and Reuters as well as CNN/ABC/BBC/NBC/CBS/etc….
As well as their political allies the Democrats. Yes I said their ALLIES – how else could their talking points be so much in sync? After all the Democrats can’t ‘win’ unless America loses and loses BIG. For the likes of Queen Nancy, Kennedy, Murtha, and the others the more american deaths the better. And the bloodier the better for the DNC.
And on the other side we have Bush who isn’t even fighting the f-king war like we should. We should be fighing it in the media, on the airwaves, as well as on the ground.
When the Tet offensive comes the media will do the exact thing they did after the real Tet offensive – no matter how big a victory we have they will gleefully claim defeat.
CrazyFool on July 7, 2007 at 4:57 PM
What about internment camps for Dems???
congsan on July 7, 2007 at 4:54 PM
I’m in! You can be prisoner #1…
JWS on July 7, 2007 at 5:03 PM
Dang I’m glad to read fighting words from Rick Santorum. July to September…time’s a’wasting for anyone to break out as a leader on this issue here at home.
RightWinged, since I find myself on the same thread with you, I hereby extend to you an overdue apology that I owe you.
RushBaby on July 7, 2007 at 5:04 PM
I was in a United States Army division in Vietnam during TET of 1968. There was indeed fierce fighting but the United States military won an overwhelming victory. Even general Giap admitted that he was beaten and the only thing that saved him was the weak willed American public. Unfortunately, it appears that we are about to see history repeat itself . . . and that will be a sad day for the Republic.
rplat on July 7, 2007 at 5:09 PM
What?
congsan on July 7, 2007 at 5:14 PM
Bring it!
TheSitRep on July 7, 2007 at 5:14 PM
congsan,
I interpreted your response to Right Winged as a sarcastic attack. If I was wrong, I apologize…
JWS on July 7, 2007 at 5:19 PM
write you congressmen or your borders won’t matter.
tomas on July 7, 2007 at 5:29 PM
Let em come out and fight, really….. Its easy to plant bombs, different to take on armed armed and highly trained troops
EricPWJohnson on July 7, 2007 at 5:40 PM
This is another friggen reason why the media and the American people do not need to know what our plans are. Crimeny! This is absolutely insane!
csdeven on July 7, 2007 at 5:40 PM
I, for one, would like to thank you for your service :).
I was 8 years old during the Tet offensive and I vaguely remember Walter Cronkite on the evening news (”and thats the way it is”…) explaining what a disaster the Tet offensive was. For over 20 years I believed that the Tet offensive was a disaster for the US.
Wrong. This is an attempt to cover up for the media. It was not the Tet offensive which shattered the political support – it was the media – the M-E-D-I-A and their treasonous protrayal of the results.
CrazyFool on July 7, 2007 at 5:42 PM
The democrats have their whole future in making sure we lose in Iraq and opening the borders for millions of what they anticipate to be millions of democratic voters. They agreed to the surge, but as soon as it started they declared we had lost. The surge is working, but will it be too late for the American people to understand what the future of this country could’ve been if we had been united as a country. Right now the democrats are fighting for their existence. They must force defeat to the terrorists or be exposed.
volsense on July 7, 2007 at 5:43 PM
Naw, it wasn’t sarcastic. Maybe not well thought out, but not sarcastic. I appreciate your apology.
congsan on July 7, 2007 at 5:49 PM
If there’s an epitaph to our involvement in the middle east, you may have just written it.
That the majority of the drive-by media are effectively a megaphone for the donkey party – and that they and their masters, both driven by mindless, relentless hatred, want more than anything else for George Bush to fail in Iraq and couldn’t care less who else might benefit from that failure – are, as far as I’m concerned, established facts.
Established as well is the enemy’s observation-based understanding of the above facts, as is their knowledge and application of the principles of asymmetric warfare. Listen to Zawahiri’s video and audio tapes, and it’s clear that he knows that the way to defeat the Americans isn’t on the battlefield but in their own media and political system.
Accordingly, of course the enemy is going to try to duplicate the Tet Offensive in some form, especially given how good a job the donkey party and its media cheerleaders have done in warping the American public’s perceptions of what’s happening and eroding their confidence in winning. Our opponents would be fools not to try such a maneuver – after all, it worked the last time, didn’t it?
The groundwork for “Tet II” is already in place:
- An American media and donkey party that have bet the farm on American defeat, and are only interested in evidnece and arguments that will support their pre-conclusion;
- An American administration that is abominally unable to enunciate its reasons for persevering in the campaign (aided by a drive-by media that filters out and distorts those reasons whenever such enunciation is attempted);
- An arbitrary, de facto deadline by which “success” or “failure” is to be established, coupled with nebulous standards for what “success” would be (thereby making “failure” much easier to identify as merely the “absence of success”); and
- An enemy who is not stupid, and who has studied and applies the lessons of the Vietnam conflict (e.g., operating out of sanctuary countries bordering the theater of conflict, using proxies instead of acting directly, and skillfully manipulating the “useful idiots” in the American media and the donkey party).
The one thing we have in our favor is that we, too, can learn the lessons of Vietnam, and LTG Petraeus clearly has. Specifically, what made Tet so devastating as an enemy propaganda tool was that it came as a surprise. If you know that the enemy is winding up for such a move, you can do a couple of things to take the wind out of their sails in advance:
(1) Brace the American public for it; and
(2) Try to neutralize it in advance militarily.
To their credit, our military leadership is trying to do both of these things. The first will be marginally successful, at best, because the American media and the donkey party aren’t interested in thwarting “Tet II” as much as they’re counting on it; accordingly, any efforts to inform the American public will be ignored, played down or distorted.
Thus, it’s the second tactic that will carry or lose the day for us. If we can effectively defuse the enemy’s efforts to mount a spectacular made-for-TV “offensive,” it may be possible to deny them the propaganda victory that their “I’m-not-with-you-even-though-I’m-standing-shoulder-to-shoulder-with-you” partners here in the US are hoping for.
Good luck, General Petraeus. You’ve got a tall order ahead.
Spurius Ligustinus on July 7, 2007 at 5:53 PM
People Need to Wake Up in This Country and FAST If they don’t realize that we are fighting a religious theology by the Muslims than we better go off to Fiji or somewhere and fast. Idiotic sheep being led by the MSM and the Democrats that are our supposed leaders of this country. I fought in TET so don’t give me the BS that the MSM isn’t pushing a deaftist agenda.
bones47 on July 7, 2007 at 5:58 PM
Not sure what the apology is for Rushbaby?
Look genius, you clearly missed my entire point. The situation only is what it is because the Dems have promised to surrender. They argued for this war and supported it until 6 months in when they had about a year until the 2004 presidential elections and they realized they could start the “WMD lies” crap to divide the country, because they stood no chance of winning otherwise. They are disgraceful, and if that isn’t evil I don’t know what is. Arguing for a war, then turning on it to divide the country to win an election. Comparing the troops to Nazis. etc. etc. etc.
The point about “decades and decades” is ridiculous and has nothing to do with anything I’ve said. I’m on the verge of supporting a pull-out because the Democrats will never let us win. When things go well, what issues do the Dems have? So they created this one. They made political hay and the enemy responded. They make speeches and promise timetables, or SAY WE LOST WHILE TROOPS ARE IN F-ING HARMS WAY and how do you think the enemy will react? They’ll thinkg “yes, that means we only need to hold out a little longer… so let’s stay away from the U.S. military, because they’ll destroy us, but we’ll keep killing civilians so that the Dems can keep making their case and eventually surrender to us. That way, not only will we have defeated the great satan, but once we’ve done it jihadi recruitment will go through the roof!”
My point is not that we should stay there for decades, it’s that we’d have drawn down a lot already if we had simply kept a united front. Not gone in with one, then had the Dems turn the war in to an election issue a few months in to something they had backed. They are sick b@stards and I can’t imagine what I might do if I’d lost someone in Iraq, knowing the Dems are doing all of this to win elections. Go on Hillary you honorable woman.. brag how you voted for the war.. brag that we got Saddam… oh wait, here comes an election… tell us you wouldn’t have voted for it if you knew then what you know now. Well who stopped you from “knowing” anything you POS!
So my point isn’t that we should stay indefinitely (unless the Dems wanted to be back on our side, sending a message to the enemy that there’s really no point in keeping this up). But when the Dems are promising a withdrawal, the enemy’s only logical reaction is to create more terror to speed up their victory. Do you not get this? I’m just repeating myself because I don’t know what else to do for you libs. Some of you are just stupid, others are dishonest, and I’m not sure which camp you fall under.
It’s not about locking Dems up, it’s about turning them in to human beings (see: Lieberman). These people are the most disgusting individuals on the planet. What they’ve done, with the help of their pals in the media, over the past few years makes me sick. The endless (baseless) investigations, because they know just that plants a seed in minds of the folks, even if after a drawn out investigation there was no wrong doing or anything… countless headlines and sound bytes have done their damage. I could list dozens of examples, but you’re so detached from reality, why bother. I do always like to point out though, that polls consistently show that more than half the country either thinks we’re in a recession or doesn’t know. Dems argue that this is because the positive economic numbers are only benefiting the rich. This would seem true when you see the public ranking the economy overwhelmingly negatively… but then you see them rank their own finances, and it’s overwhelmingly positive… Hmmmm. Doesn’t make sense huh? it’s because all we hear is “tax cuts for the rich!” “poor getting poorer” “evil corporations”, etc. This is on virtually every issue you could possibly think of. The Dems lie, the media parrots it, it changes public opinion, and the Dems try to win elections by default after trying to make the public hate the Republicans enough that they have no where else to turn.
Anyway, the point is… We shouldn’t stay there indefinitely as long as the Dems promise to surrender and give the enemy a reason to fight on. I just wish they weren’t so evil to their core. And I’m talking about the current Democratic Party.
RightWinged on July 7, 2007 at 5:59 PM
Couldn’t have said it better. If there’s anything the last few elections have shown it’s that the Dems can ONLY win with the current demographic situation if they, with the help of the media they run, can make the public hate the GOP enough. No one voted for Dems because they had ideas (because they literally didn’t have ANY… I’m begging you to name one, and please don’t pull a Jane Fleming). So the Dems can only win by default. The need those illegals to secure elections.
But back to your point about their future riding on Iraq, of course it does. They are idealess so they can’t win on ideas. They have to hope for and hype negativity to win by default. It’s is disgusting, and it’s playing with people’s lives, especially the most honorable, military members lost in this war. Does anyone think for a second that the Democrats ever wanted us to win in Iraq? Of course not, they’d have been virtually eliminated as a party! What purpose would they have served?
RightWinged on July 7, 2007 at 6:05 PM
Well, at least you got that much correct… but don’t question their patriotism!
SilverStar830 on July 7, 2007 at 6:33 PM
RightWinged, it was a crack I made awhile back accusing you of negativity. I confused you with someone else. Mistaken Identity = Mistake.
RushBaby on July 7, 2007 at 6:48 PM
No problem Rushbaby, I wasn’t even aware of it.
RightWinged on July 7, 2007 at 7:27 PM
CBS News reporting of No Confidence vote against Maliki?, Hmm, A grain of Salt comes to mind.
Egfrow on July 7, 2007 at 7:29 PM
The Dems lie, the media parrots it,
RightWinged on July 7, 2007 at 5:59 PM
I thought the two were the same ?????? That is the MSM.
SIJ6141 on July 7, 2007 at 7:43 PM
I don’t know why everyone thinks I’m being sarcastic. Why should we mind staying there for a few decades? We have the resources to stay for the long haul. I think it’s fairly disingenuous to think that we can win this without a commitment of at least a couple of decades of at least low level violent involvement.
The quip about internment camps for Democrats was that: a quip. Though I do think that a group of people who are responsible for so many evil things should probably be locked up to protect them from doing any more damage. What’s so wrong with that?
congsan on July 7, 2007 at 7:45 PM
Try to bear in mind that Michelle is held responsible for all of our little “quips”. There are other websites where your thoughts about locking up democrats will be welcome. Here at Hot Air, not so much.
RushBaby on July 7, 2007 at 8:06 PM
You can bake it or you can fry it.
You can saute it.
You can add more spice.
You can cook it for an hour or you can cook it for a hundred years.
But no matter what you do, this Iraqi nation building with Islamic Shiite and Islamic Sunni ingredients is still going to come out as $hit-on-a-shingle.
MB4 on July 7, 2007 at 8:11 PM
What about internment camps for Dems???
congsan on July 7, 2007 at 4:54 PM
Finally someone that understands the problem….oh wait you were trying to be funny….well out of the mouths of babes….
unseen on July 7, 2007 at 8:31 PM
It ain’t over ’till the fat lady sings, and Hilary isn’t elected yet.
With all of Bush’s faults, he will go out swinging and let the military do what they need to do.
…at least I hope so.
Hening on July 7, 2007 at 8:40 PM
So who is in “The Iraq Project”??
bnelson44 on July 7, 2007 at 8:45 PM
I thought you were being sarcastic. Maybe your latest post was a genuine clarification or you’ve moved onto super-ironic sarcasm I don’t know but this war is going to go on for decades either way so we might as well fight to win.
aengus on July 7, 2007 at 8:45 PM
News about the creation of a so-called ‘moderate powers front’ is making the headlines in Baghdad’s papers again. This time headed by the ruling parties, not the opposition, al-Sabah reported last Wednesday:
“The two Kurdish parties (PUK and KDP), the Dawa Party, and the SIIC agreed yesterday (Tuesday) to form a national political front that will be officially announced next week.”
…
On the other hand, the Iraqi List continues to move forward with its own plans to form the political mass we mentioned in earlier posts. Al-Mashriq wrote on Wednesday:
“Sattar Bayir, member of parliament from Allawi’s party said, ‘The negotiations have gone decently so far to form the suggested Iraqi front. The movement is to form an Iraqi front from all national parties, organizations, associations and figures.’ And he added that there are ongoing negotiations with various parties including the Accord Front, the Dialogue Front and the Fadheela Party…”
http://pajamasmedia.com/2007/07/itm.php
Can someone sort all this out?
bnelson44 on July 7, 2007 at 8:52 PM
I’m not buying it, I believe you were being sarcastic and obnoxious. I may not be that familiar with you (I assume you’re new), but your idiotic comment screams of a liberal attempting to comment here as a conservative in order to make us look bad, especially considering your comments in two other posts I found were as extreme.
RightWinged on July 7, 2007 at 8:55 PM
What is this, a witch hunt? Sure, I should have thought my stuff out more clearly, but I do believe that, if someone should be shown to be a danger to the security of this country, that they should be thrown in jail for treason.
Just cause I don’t make you comfortable doesn’t mean that I am some stupid liberal troll.
congsan on July 7, 2007 at 8:59 PM
Thank you democraps. Vietnam and Cambodia weren’t enough for you, now here’s more blood on your hands.
Zorro on July 7, 2007 at 9:21 PM
tomas, you are the Tancredo of Hot Air. You’re both single-issue guys obsessed with the border.
aengus on July 7, 2007 at 9:36 PM
Unfortunately, I’m afraid that they’re going to let the good General hang out to dry. It’s a damn shame and my husband doesn’t even want to talk about it anymore. He gets so upset about it. I thought he was going to punch this guy in the face who said “We just want our troops home and safe, is that so bad?” that was sitting next to us at the Olive Garden the other day.
Rplat, thank you for serving through a most difficult time. My half brother was killed there in 1969. When my parents were out in HI this past Christmas my father said he was afraid that this country was going to turn tail again and all this be for naught no matter how well the surge went.
As for those who want us out ASAP; we’re still in freaking Germany and Japan. It’s been 61 years since VE-day and almost the same for VJ day.
Anyway, have a good night.
Catie96706 on July 7, 2007 at 10:32 PM
I know it’s up to the Iraqis, but I’m ready to see a change at the helm of Iraq. I’m fully willing to admit that Maliki isn’t the leader I hoped he’d be, and I think it’s time to move on.
Pablo on July 8, 2007 at 12:37 AM
NEWS FLASH***********
WE ARE AT WAR
OUR ENEMIES WILL ATTACK US TO GAIN VICTORY
WE SHOULD EXPECT THIS
WE SHOULD DEFEAT THE ENEMY SO OUR SOLDIERS CAN COME HOME
What part of this is too hard for our leaders to grasp?
BUSH is a FAILED president. He has had 6 years with the greatest armed force in the history of the world to pacify a region that lives in the dark ages and has been unable to do so. He is not a war president. He is Nero and he fiddles while Rome burns.
unseen on July 8, 2007 at 12:37 AM
From the standpoint that he has the desire and the guts to attempt to rid the world of the type of terrorism that attacked us on 9/11 Bush is anything but a failure. We haven’t had a President that would have done anything except lob a few bombs in a long time.
The problem is that America hasn’t “won” a war in a long long time. The reason for that is the concept of “limited warfare”, “nation building”, and “police actions”. The truth is that limited warfare does not work. You cannot rebuild a nation while the enemy is attacking you and the only way to stop the enemy from attacking you is to destroy him completely. That is the plan that worked from ancient times through Sherman’s March To The Sea and up through the victory over Germany and Japan in WWII.
After 1945 we forgot what we learned about war, what had worked so well. The concept of effective warfare died the day Truman fired MacArthur as Supreme Commander of our troops in Korea. We then adopted the limited warfare mindset while the USSR and China perfected the war by proxy option.
Buzzy on July 8, 2007 at 5:29 AM
Parliament sucks parliament is socialistic, the United States a republic a close match to Roman rule except we have a chance every 4 years to fire the ass if we do not like him.
American8298 on July 8, 2007 at 6:11 AM
The solution is for Islamic terrorists to strike the U.S. hard enough to wake the survival response.
Hard enough to make all Trutherism, p.c.-ism and self-loathing surrender-ism melt away.
Meanwhile, the leadership has frittered away a chance to destroy jihadism by fighting it like a “winning hearts and minds” and open-to-embedded-reporters campaign.
They do not appear to undersatdn what War means.
Or how you wage it to survive.
profitsbeard on July 8, 2007 at 10:49 AM
unseen on July 8, 2007 at 12:37 AM
It’s not so much that Bush is a failed president, which would after his illegal immigration fiasco been easy enough to admit, but the the leadership of the democratic party has totally invested itself in America’s defeat in order to regain control of America. Not only has the leadership of the democratic party done this but they have been aided and abetted by the media.
Members of the House, the Senate and the media have no business what so ever dictating or even suggesting the tactics or strategies employed to fight a war. Yet time and time again we have seen them tie the hands of our fighting forces with suicidal Rules Of Engagement tactics and strategies. To make matters worse we have seen various members of congress give aid and comfort to our enemies and been forced to witness our media commit treason.
Bush is the commander in chief and ultamitly the prosecution of this war is his responsibility, but there is no question that a number of individuals in congress are attempting to subvert him and the US constitution by reassigning to themselves authority that constitutionally is soley invested in the President of the United States of America.
doriangrey on July 8, 2007 at 12:52 PM
doriangrey on July 8, 2007 at 12:52 PM
All good points. However, Bush has the power to change these ROE, he choses not too for political reasons. The Dems, REPS and media have all be responsible for the failure. there is enough blame to go around.
The attack on the constitution started with FDR and has continued pretty much non-stop since. Reagan offered a small speed bump along that path. Our constiution was written to rein in the power of government and make it a limited one. Yet our government gets larger every year. Something is broken and we need to fix it. (hint turning off the flow of money would be a good start)
unseen on July 8, 2007 at 2:56 PM
Comment pages: